megamitenseifandomcom-20200222-history
User talk:Sannse
Recent File Deletion Could you please clarify why "File:Nymph.png" was deleted when this page's image at Wookiepedia I inquired about was stated to be within ToU when I used Special:Contact to ask about the matter? Jenburton replied to the ticket but I deleted it a few months ago, unfortunately. Message 18:33, September 10, 2012 (UTC) :Not sure if you missed my question due to me adding the welcome template also. Message 02:14, September 12, 2012 (UTC) ::Hi, sorry, I wasn't around much over the last couple of days ::I don't have a great answer for you though. We only recently started looking at images on the site more carefully, and are still very much in the process of working out exactly what line we need to have. For example, there are a lot of classical works of art that include nudity, but that are socially acceptable in US culture (which has to be our benchmark, as we're based in the US). ::It looks like Jen put that in the "artistic nudity" category, which didn't apply to the image from this site - it's a very limited exception, that might have been over-extended in the case of the Wookieepedia image. ::We have a lot to do in better refining the guidelines, but we have clarified the enough for me to be confident in saying you will need to find another image for your Nymph page. Hopefully there are examples where the breasts are covered? ::And I will ask Jen to help me in reviewing the Wookieepedia image. -- sannse http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb32675/wikia/images/e/e9/WikiaStaff.png (help forum | blog) 18:19, September 12, 2012 (UTC) Forgive me for questioning this again, but I do have to wonder about the removal of useful content for the sake of removing "obscene" images, especially in cases where a "acceptable" backup can't be produced without more or less ruining the image in question. I can get removing the sprite (though it appears to have been since restored. I wouldn't know about that), that Nymph is more or less completely naked and looks completely human, but I kinda have to scratch my head at deleting the Medusa concept art because she has visible nipples. I take it that is what violated the terms of use? Again, sorry for bugging you about it, and I do mostly understand why the rule is in place, but at the same time you are removing content, so I am conflicted by this. If that makes sense.--Otherarrow (talk) 01:53, November 6, 2012 (UTC) :It makes sense that they are clearly playing favorites among the wikis, as evidenced by this page not being touched despite Wikia staff being well aware of its existance. Either enforce everything equally or I will be contacting your superiors about this matter. User:Great_MaraMessage 03:35, November 6, 2012 (UTC) :::Hi Otherarrow. Yes, visible nipples are usually the tipping point (or naked butts or genitals). It doesn't matter whether the image is fully human or not, although generally images are passed if they are not at all human. Furry art and other fantasy images can be very non-human, but also be humanlike enough to be considered explicit in nipples are shown (and are sometimes very explicit of course). In those cases, as with half-animal/half-human forms like the Medusa image, they are assessed with the same standards as for fully human images. In this case, her breasts are fully exposed, so I had to delete (as with the nymph) :::Great Mara: I think it's fair to say that there is a difference between the two images. Wookieepedia was able to argue that the painting on their wiki was by a recognized and award winning artist. Artistic images on other wikis have also been allowed, it's not specific to them. :::I think one issue we have is one of language. All drawings could be described as "art" (of varying quality), but that doesn't mean that all drawings have the extra acceptance under US mores that "artistic nudity" has. :::One of my guidelines as I review images is "is this image one that would be allowed on an the average TV show in the US?" I would say that the answer for both of these images is "no". I checked my perception with my boss, and she agreed that both were outside the ToU. :::That said, if you prefer to hear that from her, you can reach her via . If you put "Jen Burton" in the subject, it will be given directly to her. :::In the mean time, I need to re-delete that nymph image. Please do not restore it again. Thanks -- sannse http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb32675/wikia/images/e/e9/WikiaStaff.png (help forum | blog) 23:59, November 6, 2012 (UTC) ::::Bullshit. There is no difference between the image on Wookieepedia and the nymph file you deleted, so don't even try to sit there and lie to my face with some half-assed excuse about how they were able to justify something from an offshoot artbook. That content was directly from the media that this wiki covers and is a lot more pertinent than a non-canon SW artbook. And frankly, if you can't operate with an objective opinion I would ask that you have someone with an actual level of competence deal with our wiki from now on. User:Great_MaraMessage 00:21, November 7, 2012 (UTC) :::::You need to chill. No need to get rude now, Sannse is probably just doing her job. If anything, all this bickering is more likely to get the Star Wars picture deleted than it is to get our pictures restored, and then you will probably have people coming after you for that. There is no reason to get hostile, and Sannse has been nothing but polite to us about all of this. Man, I didn't want to start a shitstorm.--Otherarrow (talk) 00:29, November 7, 2012 (UTC) :::::"I think it's fair to say that there is a difference between the two images. Wookieepedia was able to argue that the painting on their wiki was by a recognized and award winning artist. Artistic images on other wikis have also been allowed, it's not specific to them." :::::Well, all images on this wikia ARE artistic drawing and most are made by Kazuma Kaneko. :::::And... what you did delete... is a sprite? which is flat(not real/3dimensional), not so large, low resolution and game-art nudity which is too. :::::I wonder if you should correct your image-rating technique. HakuNoKaemi (talk) 01:00, November 8, 2012 (UTC) ::::::Thanks Otherarrow :) ::::::Great Mara: would you agree that there is a difference in the artistic merit of a Old Master's nude, and a still from a porn movie? (I would link to examples, but...). It's not the media that makes the difference, there is plenty of video art out there, but I think most would agree that the two are very different in terms of being appropriate for general view. ::::::Of course, I chose two extremes to illustrate my point, but I do think it's fair to say that different images of a similar level of nudity can be very different in acceptability. I agree that it can be a tricky line sometimes, which is why I always ask for a second opinion in borderline cases or when someone on a wiki disagrees with the deletion. But we need to draw that line somewhere, and this image has ended up on the wrong side of it. ::::::HakuNoKaemi: I agree our definition of "artistic" is quite narrow. Really, any drawing could be described as "artistic", and we can't say "any drawing of nudity or sexual acts is OK". So we chose a line that allows for classic art and a small number of more modern works, but doesn't allow other nudity. ::::::My own view is that nudity isn't as big a deal as our culture makes it out to be - but as those are the mores we have to live with, and as Wikia is a general site with a wide variety of ages visiting here, we need to do this work to check for and remove explicit images. ::::::On the choice of image.... it wasn't really a choice. When we are working on reviewing images, we are presented with them semi-randomly (there are elements such as when it was uploaded that also influence the order). I didn't choose this image, it was presented to me by our review system after the first-level reviewers had flagged it. And with so many images across Wikia, it's going to be a while before all of them get checked. ::::::But I had a look through your last few months of image uploads to get an idea of how many more I'm likely to see in review, and it seems to be very few. There were three that were in those I looked at, and which haven't been reviewed yet - you may want to replace or adjust them now so they aren't deleted. The images are: File:Astarte.PNG, File:Nereid.png and File:190_-_Kugutsu.jpg. As you can see, two of them are also sprites - I didn't see any problems in the other images I saw. ::::::Incidentally, of the other images on Kugutsu, the tiny image in the table and the updated version of the artwork are just fine. Without the nipples, they are considered "doll nudity" - another group that I can pass. If it acceptable to your wiki's policies, you could very easily edit the other images to pass too. I'm happy to help with that if you want -- sannse http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb32675/wikia/images/e/e9/WikiaStaff.png (help forum | blog) 01:54, November 8, 2012 (UTC) :::::::I admit, this is more of a ethical question than one of policy, but do we have the right to edit these images to make them acceptable? After all, we didn't create them and we have no way to access the person who did or anyone who could give us permission (there is probably a language barrier as well). It's probably just dumb luck for us that the updated art for Kugutsu doesn't have nipples, and in general, the transition from art to sprite usually does away with such details (the Giten stuff being the exception). Also, I probably shouldn't bring this up and prolong them being deleted for as long as I can, but from my end it is kinda the big elephant in the room: does this or anything on this page violate the terms of use?--Otherarrow (talk) 02:34, November 8, 2012 (UTC) :::::::Game sprites are still to be considered art, and they're put from the acceptable part of the borderline because of them being sprites, being small and such. Plus all of the sprites are considerable "info of the game" and since this wikia contains "info of the game" they're pretty much more infos for it. The visitors of this wiki will be usually peoples who do play the game ( and probably, 16+ ) or who are just interested in mithology ( a research of some deity, monster and so can easily lead here ). :::::::The images in fact are "connected" to the description of the god/monster they're depicting: in fact Nymphs and Nereid(Sea Nymphs) are beautiful women that are usually represented nude in art, Astarte is a goddess of Love, Fertility and War ( and goddess of love and fertility are represented nude throughout story and mithologies) and Kugutsu means "marionette", which is just what he reprensented... a doll. :::::::Mara's image is a downright play on it's name (plus the fact he is a tempter, and what tempt male more than luxury?). Arioch design is (probably) inspired from Chtullian designs and he actually is, as a devil, downright ugly and demonised as the catholic want a devil to be.HakuNoKaemi (talk) 07:33, November 8, 2012 (UTC) Wait a second so this Old Master fellow's fanart of Aayla Secura is okay because the artist is award winning but Kaneko Kazuma, a professional who does the official art for the Megami Tensei series, guest work for Devil May Cry 3 & Zone of Enders 2, Super Robot Wars 3, and several novels, doesn't fly? He's also has published artbooks too. « Zahlzeit 09:07, November 8, 2012 (UTC) : Otherarrow: I can't speak from a licensing point of view (I'm obviously not a lawyer) but I would say that if you are able to use the images as "fair use", then you would also be able to use a partially obscured version in the same way. But I think the main ethical concern is whether the changed images might mislead people in to thinking that they are the full version as seen in the game. I think you can bypass that problem by mentioning the changes in the image description. for example, for the Nereid page, you might show either of these: :And add the caption "Nereid as she appears in Giten Megami Tensei (adjusted to obscure the breasts)" :I checked the pages you linked, and everything on Arioch is fine (I get it, but it's not so obvious that I need to remove it). Similarly, almost everything on Mara is OK too. The only one that would be a problem is "File:Mara2.JPG", which is just too obvious. As with other images we've discussed, I got a second opinion on this from Jen. :HakuNoKaemi: I understand that the images are valid in terms of the game universe, and that those viewing this wiki may be likely to be adult. But that doesn't change Wikia's Terms of Use, and the need for all wikis here to comply with it. :Zahlzeit: I'm sorry, I wasn't clear. I was using the Old Masters as an example of the extreme ends of the scale, not saying that the Wookieepedia image was painted by one of them. But I'm afraid that Kaneko Kazuma being a professional artist does not make the game images "artistic nudity" by Wikia's definition. And that's the definition I have to work with. -- sannse http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb32675/wikia/images/e/e9/WikiaStaff.png (help forum | blog) 01:31, November 9, 2012 (UTC) :Hmm. I see. Well, I'd be fine with having the "censored" version (specifically, the blurred, but that is just me) be up on the wiki with the caption you suggested, but one thing: Would it be OK if we link to the "uncensored" version hosted elsewhere in the file description on the file page itself? I admit, if I could help it I'd rather not have any censorship, but rules are rules and sometimes you got to compromise.--Otherarrow (talk) 01:49, November 9, 2012 (UTC) ::No Otherarrow, we don't have to compromise on this shit. I'd sooner move to another Megami Tensei wiki not hosted by the Wikia staff. This wiki is supposed to convey information so why would you willingly allow information to be obscured? ::Sannse, I recall you said that, "So the line for "artistic nudity" has to be a similar one as for that hypothetical news program - if it's classical/historical/famous art used in context". How is the artwork for a game played by thousands of people not famous? And where is Wikia's definition, because it sure as hell isn't in the Terms of Use. « Zahlzeit 02:17, November 9, 2012 (UTC) :::Well, we can bicker about dah rules with someone (probably) in no position to change them, or we can work to get the removed images up in some form. That is all I care about: Getting the images back. This wiki is supposed to convey information, and I'd rather we actually have information, censored or no. Content will always be better than no content. Of course, if there is a way for everyone to go home happy, even if otherwise extreme, go ahead and suggest it. Isn't there a "hey man, mature content, if you are not old enough get out" thing one can make come up when folks visit wikis with mature content? (I know I've seen it elsewhere, but I forget where.). And agree or disagree, can we at least keep it civil? While the post below this one does make a lot of good points, there is some passive aggressive bullshit there I think we can do without. I mean "your definition of art is in question as well"? That wasn't called for. Don't result to personal attacks in a otherwise solid post. Seriously guys, fucking chill. We can discuss this without being assholes about it.--Otherarrow (talk) 03:26, November 9, 2012 (UTC) ::::Alright Otherarrow, you have a lot of good points and I know exactly the thing you're talking about and I'd be happy to implement it if it means the soon-to-be-deleted images can stay. :::::>Of course, if there is a way for everyone to go home happy, even if otherwise extreme, go ahead and suggest it. ::::Yeah, the solution is called migrating to another web hosting service like shoutwiki or even combining with the already existing popanime Megami Tensei wiki if this string of bad administrative decisions is going to be kept up. « Zahlzeit 03:38, November 9, 2012 (UTC) :::::A extreme way that doesn't involve splitting the userbase. I'd rather we figure out a way to fix the problem here than make more problems because we made a stupid decision without thinking it through. Leaving is a big decision, and many a wiki has failed co mpletely because they didn't think it through. Sure, one or two have worked, but they had support from their fandoms that we don't have, and probably didn't leave on a knee jerk reaction.--Otherarrow (talk) 03:55, November 9, 2012 (UTC) :::::sannse, this is just even more offensive. Peoples are not idiot and like this your just HIGHLIGHTING those details even more ( never heard of "convenient censoring" ? ). Plus all the wikis are to follow the same terms, and that fanart is much more realistic and make you see the nudity much more. This do imply that if those sprite are considered offensive, that fanart is utterly offensive. HakuNoKaemi (talk) 13:21, November 9, 2012 (UTC) ::::::I have no clue what you are referring to. The concept of "convenient censoring" is when something in the foreground does the censoring for you (such as a fence obscuring the naughty bits of a naked person from the camera) Sprites and concept art don't have foregrounds. As for "highlighting those details" I still don't know what you are referring to. If you were referring to the Star Wars fanart, OK, yeah, there could have been a foreground element added to block the breasts, but obviously that wasn't the artist's intent, now was it? ...Please, don't butt into a conversation when you have no idea what people are talking about. It just gets in the way of conversation.--Otherarrow (talk) 17:22, November 9, 2012 (UTC) ::::::I was referring to those censored images she posted: having a "black bar" or a "pixelation" or a blur in such images only makes you see what's censored more, other then being just plain ugly. With "convenient" I mean literally making the censoring difficult to see ( in those cases, i would simply edit out the nipples, as it's the part taken in cause or, having the rights over it, use those long hair to cover them) HakuNoKaemi (talk) 18:10, November 9, 2012 (UTC) :::::::I personally think the burr isn't that intrusive or ugly, but hey different strokes for different folks. I could see editing off the nipples work though, but I think she'd have suggested that if it was an option.--Otherarrow (talk) 18:25, November 9, 2012 (UTC) :::::::Raw edited examples ( http://puu.sh/1ofEm ) HakuNoKaemi (talk) 19:04, November 9, 2012 (UTC) ::::::::Hrm. While it works I guess, I think it pushes how much we can edit these and get away with it. Minor touch up to fit with standards is one thing, but this goes into flat out altering huge bits of the sprite.--Otherarrow (talk) 19:09, November 9, 2012 (UTC) I see no reason to remove any of these images, honestly. Exactly what in the ToU dictates these game images and conceptual art as offensive? You agree not to use the Service to: Post or transmit any content that is obscene, pornographic...offensive... What defines the images represented on this wiki as offensive? Apply the Miller Obscenity Test to the images in question. Are these images patently offensive? Do they have any artistic value? By most legal definitions, genetalia is not objectively defined as obscene. I should think that no user on this site would be using the works here as pornographic content. By using such a fast and loose, and honestly, subjective opinion on what is defined as objectionable content on subjects you have little knowledge of, you are pressing judgement on a series known for its dark content. Not only the subject matter, but your definition of art is in question as well. Keep in mind, this is a Wikia for a game series that which the majority of games are rated Mature (17+) and thus there is suitable and previous knowledge as a warning for fans of this website. A more suitable option would be to place a warning on the Wikia front page, or images in question. - RikkuBelmont (talk) 02:18, November 9, 2012 (UTC) :Putting the warning on the front page is a good idea, I'm working on it. « Zahlzeit 02:26, November 9, 2012 (UTC) :Otherarrow: I asked that same question recently, and the answer was that links to problem content are also a problem. Sorry. :Zahlzeit: the news program criteria I was refering too, was one of explicitness not fame. We have a rather odd convention in the US that nudity in old paintings is OK to show, when more modern depictions wouldn't be. If an old painting were stolen, the news program probably wouldn't censor the image in their report. But if a new game were released, and they showed the sections of it that depicted nudity, there would be an outrage. Look at the kerfuffle around Janet Jacksons "nipple slip" for an example. :On definitions, we have some internal guidelines, which we share as necessary (as I've done here with "no nudity... which includes visible nipples, butts and genitals"). But overall, the definition of art is always going to be rather fuzzy. It's as a Supreme Court Justice said about pornography "I know it when I see it" (although, as I've said above, I frequently check my decisions with Jen or others). :Otherarrow: we do have a content warning feature, it's on a lot of humor wikis with risque content. But it doesn't change the image requirements I'm afraid. Those wikis are going through the same process as this one. :HakuNoKaemi: I don't mean to offend in any way. I'm not saying that fan art is offensive. I'm saying that naked images are not allowed (with very few exceptions) and so these images need to be removed. :Otherarrow: Yes, editing out the nipples is a potential solution. I've seen that done sucessfully on another wiki, and it can put the image in to the category of "doll nudity". :RikkuBelmont: The definition of "obscene, pornographic, abusive, offensive or profane" that Wikia uses includes nudity. It isn't a factor that not everyone would use that definition. :I understand that the game is for a mature audience, but I don't believe that it's not possible to have a general-audience wiki about a mature-audience game. :Zahlzeit: a main page notice won't change the requirements I'm afraid. :We're at the week's end now, and I am going to be unavailable over the weekend (there are other staff available if you need them of course). I have left images in place while we discussed the situation, but I can't hold them back from the queue much longer. I'm afraid I will need to do the deletions next week. :It would be great if you could look at the suggested adjustments before then, so I don't need to delete anything (although I can't see a solution for File:Mara2.JPG). :It feels as though we have all said what there is to say on this. I have to move on to other wikis next week, so won't be able to continue this discussion. If you want to hear from someone else at Wikia, I can ask Jen to visit - but I have to say, she will only repeat what I've said. :I honestly do believe that this is solvable with a little editing and a few image replacements. And that this won't reduce the value of this obviously well-run and comprehensive wiki. -- sannse http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb32675/wikia/images/e/e9/WikiaStaff.png (help forum | blog) 19:14, November 9, 2012 (UTC) ::Well, not even being able to link to the "real" versions is a problem, but it seems there isn't much we can do about it at the moment. I do think that editing off the nipples would probably be the best bet for at least the sprites, it might be a bit too obvious an alteration for art though. Of course, there is the problem of getting someone who can edit the images in question (from the hair example, I think at least HakuNoKaemi can). I admit, this isn't the most ideal solution, but I do think that reaching the ideal solution is probably beyond our reach at the moment. Sorry for any trouble everyone.--Otherarrow (talk) 19:29, November 9, 2012 (UTC) :::Wait we can't even externally link the images? Not even by enclosing it in words similar to what we already do for P4G trailers? « Zahlzeit 09:26, November 11, 2012 (UTC) Damage Editting the sprites the way Haku did makes it seem as if that is the original sprite, I would rather have black lines and pixelation.. on pixels than that. False information is a no no. So now that Sannse has laid down the law with no way of compromise, are we moving or not? Plenty of people I know had echoed this sentiment even when I was just first editting the wiki. And only this is the first in many crazy administrative decisions that the Wikia staff has made. I'm tired of this shit. And yes we will be retaining ALL information, the only difference I can see is that there will be a universal monobook them. « Zahlzeit 22:38, November 9, 2012 (UTC) :Yeah, we aren't editing the sprites like that. I have said as much. Also, really? Leaving over this minor BS? That's pathetic. What's next, you are going to claim corruption if I revert one of your edits because I felt the edit was wrong? Are you going to claim prude if I remove one of your witty captions because I felt it might be in bad taste? Grow a pair, will ya? We aren't moving over a knee jerk reaction over something as minor as freaking nipples. Wikia doesn't even mind the super explicit crap like penis chariot Mara or pussy mouth Arioch. And if you didn't notice, this is the compromise. Compromise doesn't mean "exactly my way with nothing given up on my end". If there was no compromise, she wouldn't even have offered to give use time to edit this crap, she'd have deleted it right then and there. And leaving doesn't change the fact that we still have to fix the problem here. Running away doesn't make the wiki or it's problems magically go away. At most, we'd end up with two near identical wikis. Only one has uncensored nipples. Like I said, we don't have any prominent fans or fandom support that would allow one wiki to grow past the other. Seriously, think this through.--Otherarrow (talk) 22:57, November 9, 2012 (UTC) ::I really think that a little bit of adjustment will work for most images. Would you like me to edit the images for you? I can't necessarily do it for all images deleted from here (I don't know how many we are talking about yet, I've not looked though all of of the images here), but I could certainly do the ones mentioned above. That is, File:Astarte.PNG, File:Nereid.png, and File:190_-_Kugutsu.jpg. File:Mara2.JPG also needs obcuring, but I don't think it's possible to obscure that enough without losing the point of the image. I can do black bars or pixelation, whichever you feel best. -- sannse http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb32675/wikia/images/e/e9/WikiaStaff.png (help forum | blog) 01:46, November 15, 2012 (UTC) :::Well, since no one has offered to do it, yeah. That would be a great help. I personally am leaning towards pixelation, but as long as people know it's censored then I am fine. Of course, I still have to say the fact that this has come up at all kinda sucks, but eh, a discussion for another time. Thanks again for offering to help us out.--Otherarrow (talk) 03:05, November 15, 2012 (UTC) ::::And done. I deleted Mara2, but the others are just pixelated enough to get them past the image review process. Hopefully there won't be more that need to be pixelated or deleted, I'll try and keep an eye out for ones from this wiki -- sannse http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb32675/wikia/images/e/e9/WikiaStaff.png (help forum | blog) 00:27, November 16, 2012 (UTC) :::::Alright, thank you. I'll probably be going along and noting that the images are censored on the pages, but hey.--Otherarrow (talk) 01:18, November 16, 2012 (UTC)